Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - TylerDurden

Pages: 1 ... 589 590 591 592 593 [594] 595 596 597 598 599 ... 612
14826
Primal Diet / Re: Questions from Newbie
« on: September 07, 2008, 05:46:02 pm »
I heard from one Primal Dieter that Aajonus' list is not too extensive and most of the food-sources are far too expensive. Better to look for local sources using grassfed/organic food directories like www.eatwild.com to find contact details of nearby farms.

14827
General Discussion / Re: What are you eating right now?
« on: September 07, 2008, 05:36:49 pm »
Raw leg of lamb(I'm also using a little moutarde de meaux, for once, even though it's not ideal - it's supposedly without preservatives but is probably not raw).

14828
Hot Topics / Re: Article says humans became intelligent because of cooked food
« on: September 07, 2008, 03:31:01 am »
Re Nicola's article:- This is absurd. First, the anti-rawists promote Wrangham's ideas that cooking was started between 1.8 to 2.3 million years ago, and then, when these ideas are totally refuted due to lack of evidence, they come up with a figure of 150,000 years, instead. From what I've read, hearths came into being c.250,000 to 3000,000 yers ago, NOT 150,000 years ago, so any spurt in intelligence could NOT have been due to cooked-foods. Indeed, some anthropologists  have claimed that the nearest spurt in civilisation/evolution was only 60,000 years ago when we invented traps, and subsequently bow and arrows.

*It's amusing how the anti-raw crowds are so desperate that they will invent new , much more recent, dates so as to back up their absurd arguments. When one looks at the evidence for 1.8 to 2.3 million years ago, a far more likely explanation for bigger brains emerges, namely consumption of raw meats/organ-meats.


14829
Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« on: September 07, 2008, 03:22:45 am »
I'm impressed, Lex. So many other online groups focus on opinions/studies etc., but you at least prefer to rely on your own experiences and measure them, regardless of others' opinions.

14830
Off Topic / Re: True or False
« on: September 07, 2008, 03:19:57 am »
Err, False. Are you a helicopter pilot or are you just running out of ideas?


The person below me has a dominant sense, which is not smell, but one of the other 4 senses:-

14831
Off Topic / Re: Are you circumcised?
« on: September 06, 2008, 09:02:13 pm »
Quote from: goodsamaritan on September 06, 2008, 08:43:34 pm


Basically the reason is the baby is too small, the doctor might chop off is penis; and the baby is fully self-aware and gets into horrific pain at such a young age.

At 10 to 12 years old, it is a right of passage that every Filipino boy is mentally conditioned to go through with.  I had to remind my father to circumsize me, that is why I felt I was overage at 13 to be circumsized.  We did laugh at a rather tall high school classmate when he was found out to be uncircumsized at a medical check up.  He had his circumsicion at 16.  Man, that is old.

Yes, that makes sense, as one of the key points made by anti-circumcision groups is that there is a small chance of failure due to the knife slipping etc.(0.2 %/2.0%?), a figure which is even higher outside the US. And babies can experience trauma.

There's something to be said for rites of passage. Some hunter-gatherer tribes have been pretty brutal in the past re subjecting their sons to such rituals. The argument is, apparently, that the tougher the "test", the more value the person will place on becoming a fully adult member of the tribe/society, facing up to responsibilities etc. - like Groucho Marx stated(more or less - no one wants to join a club where just anyone can become a member). Cults and secret societies also go for elaborate,tough rituals in order to  gain respect from the new member. Hazing in US colleges is such an example. Still, I'd far rather have done a really dangerous puberty-initiation-rite such as the Masais'(ie killing a  lion with a spear), than more drastic alterations.

14832
Off Topic / Re: Are you circumcised?
« on: September 06, 2008, 08:30:14 pm »
Quote from: Craig on September 06, 2008, 10:08:55 am
Yes but I wish I hadn't been. I agree with Sully that it protects the head. The most sensitive part is exposed and becomes desensitized as a result. An analogy would be running barefooted vs running with shoes. Protected feet are more sensitive. I'm sure that if foreskins served no purpose, there'd be no need to be born with them. 

You do know there is such a thing as "foreskin restoration/foreskin reconstruction"?

14833
Off Topic / Re: Are you circumcised?
« on: September 06, 2008, 08:28:24 pm »
Quote from: wodgina6722 on September 06, 2008, 08:37:34 am
I don't think anyone in my age group was circumcised in the UK at that time unless the parents asked them to.

It seems to be very rare in the UK. It's only practised, really, by Jews and Muslims and some of the African immigrants.

14834
Off Topic / Re: Are you circumcised?
« on: September 06, 2008, 06:29:56 pm »
Quote from: goodsamaritan on September 06, 2008, 08:31:35 am
Yes.
In our country it is unacceptable for a Filipina woman to marry or entertain in courtship a Filipino man who is uncircumcised.
I got circumsised when I was 13 years old.
That surprises me. I'd always thought that Roman Catholics were much less likely to accept circumcision, due to the whole notion of the integrity/beauty of the whole human body(also St Paul was vehemently against it:-
http://www.cirp.org/library/history/

I know that there are Muslims in the Phillipines but I'd assumed that they were in a minority, compared to the Roman Catholics, there. Perhaps this is a practice left over from before the Spaniards arrived?

Circumcised at 13? That must have been frightful. The usual reason given for why circumcision is OK, is that it's done during infancy when the baby is not fully self-aware.

14835
General Discussion / Re: Where to buy high meat jars on the net?
« on: September 06, 2008, 06:19:43 pm »
All I know is that Primal Dieters use things caled "Bell Jars" or "vacuum-sealed" jars. If you can't find such products, I would suggest storing the raw meats in a plastic, sealable box, and putting it in a hole in the ground, with only a litle soil above, so you can air the meats every now and then. You are in the countryside, I believe?

14836
Off Topic / Re: True or False
« on: September 06, 2008, 06:11:30 pm »
Treu(German, French and English - can understand many words from modern Greek, Italian, Spanish and similiar Latin languages as I did Latin Ancient Grek languages at school)I asked that question previously  and no one seemed to answer it.

The person below me is a bit too lazy right now.

14837
Welcoming Committee / Re: so glad to find this...
« on: September 06, 2008, 03:34:10 am »
I'm afraid wikipedia disagrees with you, among other sources(tongue is an organ-meat(it's always treated as such by farmers, anyway):-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(anatomy)#Organs_of_the_human_body_by_region

14838
General Discussion / Re: Tongue
« on: September 06, 2008, 02:02:10 am »
Quote from: Felicie on September 06, 2008, 01:29:41 am
Thank you. So you basically swallow very tiny pieces of the food that is hard/impossible to chew. I could try it next time. It's to bad for me though, because I like chewing the food. That's how I enjoy the taste and texture of what I'm eating. Swallowing without chewing is sort of like taking vitamins.

Getting really fresh kidneys and other parts is a problem. I'll need to be inventive and try to find access to fresh meat. Ask around to see if anyone knows a farmer.

Nicola, forgive me for being personal, but you look absolutely glowing on your avatar. Whatever you are eating must be agreeing with you. :)

Sorry, correction, I personally cut out rather big pieces(just small enough to still fit in the mouth and swallow without too much hassle, after 0, 1 or 2 quick 1-second chomps/chews with the teeth). newbies, though, find that, to get used to more unusual items like raw organ-meats, one has to start off with tiny slivers, and chase them down with a gulp of mineral-water each time. I recommend alkaline(Ph 7+) mineral-water for taste-reasons.

14839
Off Topic / Are you circumcised?
« on: September 06, 2008, 01:28:44 am »
Out of boredom, I decided to ask a quirky question about RPF members, here!


14840
Off Topic / Re: New Game
« on: September 06, 2008, 01:26:34 am »
Analog.

Left or right?

14841
Welcoming Committee / Re: so glad to find this...
« on: September 06, 2008, 12:23:38 am »
Quote from: Raw Kyle on September 06, 2008, 12:16:22 am
Tongue and heart aren't organs guys!

They're considered to be organs, even if they're muscles as well.

14842
General Discussion / Re: Tongue
« on: September 06, 2008, 12:23:01 am »
Very intersting Thanks.

14843
Off Topic / Re: True or False
« on: September 05, 2008, 11:21:55 pm »
Quote from: Raw Kyle on September 05, 2008, 08:07:41 pm
True, from a coffee shop!

The person below me uses a cell phone.

Yes, but only for receiving calls/messages. I hate phones, the ringing etc.

The person below me hates shaving.

14844
General Discussion / Re: Tongue
« on: September 05, 2008, 11:19:02 pm »
Quote from: Nicola on September 05, 2008, 09:28:51 pm
Geoff, do we digest raw better by not chewing repeatedly? How/why?

Nicola

I believe the idea is that cooked-food contains no enzymes so it needs to be broekn up by chewing so as to allow a great surface-area, and therefore greater contact with the hydrochloric acid in the human stomach.With rawists, the enzymes are already within the food, so chewing is unnecessary. I'm not sure of the exact mechanism, I can only go by what myself and others state, which is that we find we digest  raw animal food better if we just bolt it down with minimal chewing.

14845
Off Topic / Re: worried about upcoming Codex?
« on: September 05, 2008, 11:15:59 pm »
Quote from: TheWayCreatesTheWarrior on September 05, 2008, 09:29:10 pm
just wondering what everyone is planning on doing in the near future when Codex Alimentarius is passed(Dec31,09)?
seeing it will be mandatory for all livestock to be given rGH and Antibiotic injections.
at least this is the time it will be est. in the US, its already underway in the UK, and the rest of the ONE WORLD soon enough.
i guess owning your own livestock, or hunting is the only hope, but then youll be a terrorist.

I was surprised to hear about this. I'd thought that UK cattle(organic/grassfed, anyway) were never fed antibiotics or growth-hormones. And this stuff you mention re the Codex Alimentarius seems to be wrong, given the statement below:-

"The Codex meeting also agreed to new guidelines for organic livestock production. According to these guidelines, organic livestock farming should aim to use natural breeding methods, minimize stress in animals, prevent disease, and progressively eliminate the use of certain chemical veterinary drugs, including antibiotics. Animals should mainly be fed with high quality organic feed, not meat and bone meal, although fish and milk products are acceptable. The use of growth hormones is not permitted."

taken from:-
http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2001/en/pr2001-33.html

OK, it's from 2001, but I don't see how they could have changed it all. Plus, organic farmers/consumers would be UP IN ARMS if growth-hormones really were going to be allowed to be used on UK organic-raised cattle.



14846
Primal Diet / (Canadian?) Article about the Primal Diet
« on: September 05, 2008, 07:50:48 pm »
Here it is:-

http://www.vueweekly.com/article.php?id=7032

14847
General Discussion / Re: Raw Foodism wikipedia page
« on: September 05, 2008, 07:19:30 pm »
I've just noticed that at least 1 other pro-raw-foodist has been adding in lots of  images and text to the raw foodism wikipedia page, in a way that's very helpful. I presume it's one of our members here. I am most grateful.

14848
Hot Topics / Re: American usage
« on: September 05, 2008, 06:58:59 pm »
Quote from: Craig on September 05, 2008, 06:47:42 pm
It's the East Asians that are offended by the term Oriental even though the Orient means the East. We generally just use "Asian" for this if we are unsure of the specific country they're from. For western Asian, we usually use the country eg Indian, which then we'll have to go a bit further to specify Asian Indian so as not to be confused with American Indian. Going further west, we use Arabic or Middle Eastern if we're unsure of the country. We never refer to Ukrainians or Russians as either Oriental or Asian, even though they are. I suppose it's because they look more European. And then, we have the southeast Asians - Philippines, Vietnamese, Indonesians, Thais, etc...

Craig

Interesting. I'm amused that you think Russians and Ukrainians are Asians. I've been to the Ukraine and can tell you that most of the population(and that of Russia) would not look out-of-place in, say, Sweden or Norway - well, OK, a number of Russian Slavs in the countryside of Russia are more Central-European-looking than Northern, but certainly not Asian.
There's a tiny minority who are of mixed Tartar stock(from past invasions from the East), but that's all. I remember one Ukrainian being very vehement about being described as an "Eastern European". He stated that the Ukraine was actually in the centre of Europe with Russia being in the east of Europe. He's right, of course. Europe officially stops at the Urals, which is a "(third?) of the way towards the Pacific.

14849
Off Topic / Re: True or False
« on: September 05, 2008, 06:52:59 pm »
Quote from: stevesurv on September 05, 2008, 06:32:27 am
False.

The person below me is an only child.

False.

The person below me has been to Italy.

14850
Hot Topics / American usage
« on: September 05, 2008, 06:20:15 pm »
There was some sort of uproar on a crappy TV show. Only thing that interested me re the news item, was that, apparently, the term "Oriental" is, apparently, considered offensive in the US. This makes no sense at all and seems ridiculous - anyone know why? In the UK, the word "Oriental" is used to describe Chinese/Japanese and Koreans, and (I think)just means man/woman of the Orient(ie "East").The only people we call "Asians" are those from the South Asian continent(ie Afghanistan/Pakistan/India/Nepal/Bhutan and Bhangladesh). It does seem a bit ridiculous to lump all these peoples together (Chinese with afghans) under one term as the Americans do, when they are so very different.

Pages: 1 ... 589 590 591 592 593 [594] 595 596 597 598 599 ... 612
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk